Search Results for "interest refund"

2419 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 2419 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Clarifies 'Commercial Purpose' Under Consumer Protection Act for Company Purchases for Director Use. The Court held that purchase of a vehicle by a company for personal use of its directors does not amount to commercial purpose under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

The Supreme Court of India heard a batch of appeals concerning the interpretation of 'commercial purpose' under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protec...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Recovery of Excess Pay in Ordnance Factory Case. Recovery of Excess Amount Paid Due to Employer's Mistake Held Impermissible When Employees Are in Same or Higher Pay Scale and No Misrepresentation Is Involved.

The petitioners, employees of Ordnance Factory Bhandara, were granted a higher pay scale by the employer. Subsequently, the employer sought to recover...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Appeal by Lessee in Land Cancellation Case — SIPCOT's Resumption of Unutilized Land Upheld. Clause 14(i) of Lease Deed Permits Cancellation of Allotment for Non-Use; Appellant Failed to Prove Industrial Utilization of Excess Land.

The appellant, Kems Forging Ltd (formerly Sri Lakshmi Industrial Forge and Engineers Ltd), was allotted an industrial plot by SIPCOT on 05.12.2005, an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Appeal Against SIPCOT Land Cancellation — Lease Clause 14(i) Requires Show Cause Notice Before Resumption of Unutilized Land. SIPCOT's cancellation of 3.70 acres without prior notice violates natural justice; order set aside and matter remitted for fresh consideration.

The appellant, Kems Forging Ltd (formerly Sri Lakshmi Industrial Forge and Engineers Ltd), was allotted an industrial plot by SIPCOT on 05.12.2005, an...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals in Specific Performance Suit — Agreement to Sell Not Proved, but Alternative Relief of Damages Granted. Court holds that failure to prove agreement does not bar claim for earnest money refund under Section 22 of Specific Relief Act, 1963.

The appellant, an architect, filed three suits for specific performance of agreements to sell immovable property against Gustavo Pinto and Lucio Miran...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Allows Writ Petition for Condonation of Delay in Investment Under Section 54EC of Income Tax Act, 1961 — CBDT's Rejection Set Aside. The CBDT's power under Section 119(2)(b) is not circumscribed by any time limit and must be exercised liberally to avoid hardship.

The petitioner, Dr. Sujatha Ramesh, sold an immovable property during the Assessment Year 2013-14 and realized long-term capital gains. To claim exemp...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Recovery of Excess Pay Due to Suppression of Material Undertaking. Employee Bound by Written Undertaking to Refund Excess Payments and Failure to Disclose It Violated Principle of Clean Hands in Writ Jurisdiction.

The writ petition arose from orders dated 18.11.2019 and 22.11.2019 issued by the Sub-Divisional Engineer, Civil, Zilla Parishad, Vaijapur, directing ...